draft environmental assessment for the youghiogheny river ... and...a mp was developed for the...

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

Youghiogheny River Lake Master Plan and Shoreline Management Plan

August 2021

Table of Contents 1 Introduction ....................................................................................................................4

1.1 Project Location ......................................................................................................4 1.2 Project Overview .....................................................................................................5 1.3 Authorization and Project Description....................................................................6 1.4 National Environmental Policy Act Overview ........................................................6 1.5 Previous NEPA Documentation .............................................................................6

2 Purpose and Need ........................................................................................................7 2.1 Master Plan Overview.............................................................................................7 2.2 Shoreline Management Plan Overview .................................................................8 2.3 Purpose and Need for the 2021 MP and 2021 SMP.............................................8

3 Alternatives ....................................................................................................................9 3.1 No Action .................................................................................................................9 3.2 Proposed Action – Adoption of the 2021 MP and 2021 SMP...............................9

3.2.1 Master Plan ......................................................................................................9 3.2.2 Shoreline Management Plan .........................................................................15

4 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences .......................................24 4.1 Aesthetics ..............................................................................................................25

4.1.1 Existing Condition ..........................................................................................25 4.1.2 Environmental Consequences ......................................................................25

4.2 Air Quality ..............................................................................................................25 4.2.1 Existing Condition ..........................................................................................25 4.2.2 Environmental Consequences ......................................................................27

4.3 Aquatic Resources, Wetlands, Hydrology, and Water Quality ........................... 28 4.3.1 Existing Condition ..........................................................................................28 4.3.2 Environmental Consequences ......................................................................29

4.4 Invasive Species ...................................................................................................30 4.4.1 Existing Condition ..........................................................................................30 4.4.2 Environmental Consequences ......................................................................30

4.5 Fish and Wildlife Habitat .......................................................................................31 4.5.1 Existing Condition ..........................................................................................31 4.5.2 Environmental Consequences ......................................................................31

4.6 Federally Protected Species, including Threatened and Endangered Species 32 4.6.1 Existing Condition ..........................................................................................32 4.6.2 Environmental Consequences ......................................................................33

4.7 Historic Properties and Other Cultural Resources ..............................................33 4.7.1 Existing Condition ..........................................................................................33

4.8 Floodplains ............................................................................................................34 4.8.1 Existing Condition ..........................................................................................34 4.8.2 Environmental Consequences ......................................................................34

4.9 Hazardous, Toxic, and Radioactive Waste..........................................................35 4.9.1 Existing Condition ..........................................................................................35 4.9.2 Environmental Consequences ......................................................................35

4.10 Land Use............................................................................................................36 4.10.1 Existing Condition .......................................................................................36 4.10.2 Environmental Consequences ...................................................................36

4.11 Navigation ..........................................................................................................36 4.12 Noise Levels ......................................................................................................36

4.12.1 Existing Condition .......................................................................................36 4.12.2 Environmental Consequences ...................................................................37

4.13 Public Infrastructure...........................................................................................37 4.13.1 Existing Condition .......................................................................................37 4.13.2 Environmental Consequences ...................................................................37

4.14 Environmental Justice and Socio-economics ..................................................38 4.14.1 Existing Condition .......................................................................................40 4.14.2 Environmental Consequences ...................................................................40

4.15 Climate Change .................................................................................................40 4.15.1 Existing Condition .......................................................................................40 4.15.2 Environmental Consequences ...................................................................41

4.16 Child Health and Safety ....................................................................................41 4.16.1 Existing Condition .......................................................................................41 4.16.2 Environmental Consequences ...................................................................41

5 Summary of Environmental Effects............................................................................41 6 Compliance with Environmental Laws .......................................................................42

7 Public Involvement ......................................................................................................47 8 References ..................................................................................................................48

1 Introduction The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) is responsible for the maintenance, restoration, and stewardship of natural resources on the multipurpose reservoir projects it manages. To facilitate the management and use of these lands, the Corps maintains a Master Plan (MP) and a Shoreline Management Plan (SMP) for each project. A MP is required for each Civil Works Project and all fee-owned lands for which the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) has administrative responsibility. The MP serves as a strategic land-use management document that guides

i

mited resources while

the comprehensive management and development of all recreational, natural, and cultural resources throughout the life of the Youghiogheny River Lake Project (Project). The existing Project MP was completed in 2007 but has not been comprehensively revised since then. A SMP provides policies and guidelines for the effective long-term management of the shorel ne resources at the Project. The SMP is an appendix of a project’s Operational Management Plan, mandated by Engineer Regulation (ER) 1130-2-406, which manages the aesthetic and environmental characteristics of a reservoir and protects li balancing public shoreline license requests. The existing Lakeshore Management Plan dates back to 1987. The Pittsburgh District Corps is proposing to adopt and implement revis

The purpose of this Environmental Assessment (EA) is to assess the impact of proposed updates to the Project MP and SMP, and to ensure compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and other environmental laws. The EA will also provide an opportunity for public involvement in the decision-making process. This EA has been prepared in accordance with NEPA and the Council on Environmental Quality’s (CEQ) Regulations (40 CFR §1500-1508), and the Corps ER 200-2-2, Procedures for Implementing NEPA.

1.1 Project Location Youghiogheny River Lake is located on the Youghiogheny River in southwestern Pennsylvania (Fayette and Somerset Counties) and northwestern Maryland (Garrett County). Pittsburgh is approximately 75 miles northwest of the Project. The Youghiogheny River generally flows toward the northwest to its confluence with the Monongahela River just south of Pittsburgh. The dam is located 1.2 miles upstream from Confluence, Pennsylvania. The Project extends southward approximately 17 miles to Friendsville, Maryland (Figure 1).

ions to the Youghiogheny River Lake MP and SMP.

US Army Corps of EngineersPittsburgh District Youghiogheny Master Plan Environmental Assessment 4

Figure 1. Project vicinity map.

1.2 Project Overview The Youghiogheny River Lake Dam is a rolled earth dam with an impervious core. The dam is 184 feet in height above the streambed, 1,610 feet in length, and 1,100 feet in width. The dam structures include a concrete lined tunnel, 18 feet in diameter and 1,800 feet in length with three vertical lift gates.

The Project covers a total of 4,323.18 acres. That acreage includes land held in fee, land subject to flowage and operations easements and land subject to the federal navigational servitude. The drainage area above the dam is 434 square miles. The dam has the capability to store the equivalent run-off of 11 inches of precipitation. Near the dam, the Corps maintains a Project office, ranger office, public restroom, two maintenance buildings, and two government dwellings. The Project also operates the Outflow Recreation Area, Mill Run Recreation Area, Somerfield North Recreation Area, and the Spillway Recreation Area.


The Corps leases 1879.8 acres of Project lands and waters to the Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission (PAFBC), 829.3 acres to the Maryland Department of Natural Resources (Maryland DNR), 55.4 acres to the Laurel Highlands Outdoor Center (Yough Lake Campground), 10.8 acres to Leskinen Enterprises LLC (Yough Lake Marina), and 9.1 acres to the Town of Friendsville. A map of the Project and the surrounding area is in Appendix B, Plate 2 of the MP. Project lands, as referred to throughout this EA, include those lands acquired by the Corps for the Project and are depicted within the red “Fee Boundary” outline shown in Plate 2 of the MP.

1.3 Authorization and Project Description The Project was authorized by the United States Congress as part of the Flood Control Act of 1938. The Project is authorized for flood control along the Youghiogheny, Monongahela, and Ohio River Valleys. Storage is only allocated for flood control, water quality control, and water supply. The Project is operated for the purposes of flood control, water quality control, fish and wildlife, recreation, and water supply. The Project also has hydropower capabilities and a non-federal hydropower facility exists at the Project.

The Project, as one of 16 flood control facilities in the Pittsburgh District, in conjunction with other reservoirs in the District, provides flood risk reduction along the Monongahela and Ohio Rivers.

1.4 National Environmental Policy Act Overview Within NEPA, the CEQ regulations, and the Corps regulations, a process is set forth where the Corps must assess the environmental effects of proposed federal actions and consider reasonable alternatives to their proposed actions. In general, NEPA requires federal agencies to make a series of evaluations and decisions that anticipate adverse effects on environmental resources. For those actions with the greatest potential to create significant environmental effects, the consideration of the proposed action and alternatives is presented in an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). Where the potential effects of the proposed action are not determined to be significant, the agencies prepare an EA. The revision to the Youghiogheny River Lake Project Master Plan is accompanied by an EA to support the decision making.

The CEQ’s NEPA Regulations do not contain a detailed discussion regarding the format and content of an EA, but an EA must briefly discuss the need for the proposed action, the proposed action and alternatives, probable environmental effects of the proposed action and alternatives, and agencies and persons consulted in the preparation of the EA.

1.5 Previous NEPA Documentation Several Record of Environmental Consideration (REC) documents were completed recently at the Project. In August 2020, a REC was completed documenting NEPA compliance for the removal of an overflow parking, and the upgrading of a separate existing parking area to include parking lot improvements and Americans with


Disabilities Act (ADA) compliant accessible parking at the Somerfield North Recreation Area. In October 2020, a REC was completed documenting environmental compliance for an expansion of the boat ramp at the Somerfield North Recreation Area. In November 2020, a REC was completed documenting environmental compliance for rehabilitation of the Jockey Hollow Visitor Center building, surrounding landscaping, and parking lot.

2 Purpose and Need 2.1 Master Plan Overview A MP was developed for the Project in 2007. It is Corps policy that each MP shall be reviewed on a periodic basis and revised as required. ER 1130-2-550 establishes the policy for the management of recreation programs and activities, and for the operation and maintenance of Corps of Engineers recreation facilities and related structures, at civil works water resource projects.

The MP is the strategic land use management document that guides the comprehensive management and development of all recreational, natural, and cultural resources throughout the life of the Project. The MP guides efficient and cost-effective management, development, and use of Project lands. The MP also guides and articulates Corps responsibilities pursuant to Federal laws to preserve, conserve, restore, maintain, manage, and develop the Project lands, waters, and associated resources. The MP is a dynamic operational document projecting what could and should happen over the life of the Project and is flexible based upon changing conditions. The MP deals in concepts, not in details of design or administration. Detailed management and administration functions are addressed in the Operational Management Plan (OMP), which implements the concepts of the MP as operational actions.

MPs are required for civil works projects and other fee-owned lands for which the Corps has administrative responsibility for management of natural and manmade resources. Engineer Pamphlet (EP) 1130-2-550 establishes guidance for the preparation of MPs. As stated therein, the primary goals of the MPs are to prescribe an overall land and water management plan, resource objectives, and associated design and management concepts, which:

1. Provide the best management practices to respond to regional needs, resource capabilities and suitabilities, and expressed public interests and desires consistent with authorized Project purposes;

2. Protect and manage project natural and cultural resources through sustainable environmental stewardship programs;

3. Provide public outdoor recreation opportunities that support project purposes and public demands created by the project itself while sustaining project natural resources;


4. Recognize the particular qualities, characteristics, and potentials of the project; and;

5. Provide consistency and compatibility with national objectives and other state and regional goals and programs.

2.2 Shoreline Management Plan Overview The last SMP, known at the time as a Lakeshore Management Plan (LMP), was completed in 1987. Title 36 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 327.30 Shoreline

shoreline allocations, rules, regulations, and other information relative to the Shoreline Management Program; and ensures that program management actions are based on current information and regulations through collaboration with the public, stakeholders, and subject matter experts.

Management on Civil Works Projects and Engineering Regulation (ER) 1130-2-406 Project Operation – Shoreline Management at Civil Works Projects require that a SMP be prepared for each USACE project where private shoreline use is allowed. The ER also requires that the SMP be reviewed every 5 years and updated as necessary. SMP updates must comply with NEPA and include public participation to the maximum extent practicable. This EA evaluates the impacts associated with the implementation of the proposed SMP and addresses the environmental effects of the changes to existing conditions as a result of the proposed 2021 update to the SMP.

The SMP provides policies and guidelines for the effective long-term management of the shoreline resources at the Project. Recreational demands have increased at the Project. The proposed updates consider the increased demands on private shoreline use and balance those recreational uses with managing the Project’s finite resources for present and future generations to protect the natural environmental conditions of the Project. The SMP also considers means of restoration where degradation has occurred.

2.3 Purpose and Need for the 2021 MP and 2021 SMP It is Corps policy that each MP and SMP shall be reviewed on a periodic basis and revised as required (ER 1130-2-550 and ER 1130-2-406). The existing Project MP was approved in 2007 and the existing LMP was approved in 1987.

The newly drafted, Youghiogheny River Lake 2021 Master Plan (2021 MP) and Youghiogheny River Lake 2021 Shoreline Management Plan (2021 SMP) provide a comprehensive description of the project, a discussion of factors influencing resource management and development, an identification and discussion of special problems, a synopsis of public involvement and input to the planning process, and descriptions of past, present, and proposed development.

The proposed 2021 SMP incorporates updates to policies and regulations pertaining to the shoreline of Youghiogheny River Lake; maintains aesthetic and environmental characteristics of the reservoir for the full benefit of the general public; addresses


3 Alternatives When preparing an EA, the Corps should develop a range of alternatives that could reasonably achieve the need that the proposed action is intended to address. The alternatives being considered in this EA are a no action alternative of continuing to operate the Project under the 2007 MP and the 1987 LMP, and the proposed action of operating the Project consistent with a new MP and SMP. The preparation of an environmental assessment, with only two alternatives (continuing to operate the Project

replace the 2007 MP. The 2021 MP addresses important updates due to recreation demand, amenities within the project, current environmental conditions, and pertinent laws and policies. The 2021 MP changes the land classification nomenclature and lays out future recommendations for management of both recreation and natural resources. While the nomenclature has changed, the uses of those lands will remain similar to their

without a new MP and SMP, and operating the Project with a new MP and SMP) is appropriate because there are no other reasonable alternatives to consider for evaluation.

3.1 No Action NEPA requires that federal agencies describe and analyze a no action alternative. The no action alternative considers what would happen if the Corps continued operating and managing the Project under the 2007 MP and 1987 LMP, neither of which would be revised or updated. The no action alternative provides a baseline from which other alternatives can be compared and evaluated.

Under the no action alternative, the 2007 MP would continue to be the document used for management of the Project. The 2007 MP would not account for any changes at the Project or in the surrounding areas that occurred after 2007. The 2007 MP does not include the updated land classifications (see MP Section 3.2) and is out of date with current Corps regulations. Without an updated MP, future development decisions would therefore be assessed on an ad hoc basis without the benefit of a comprehensive assessment of recreation and natural resource conditions and opportunities at the Project.

Under the no action alternative, the 1987 LMP would continue to be the document used for the management of the Project’s shoreline. It would not account for any changes at the Project that occurred after 1987. The 1987 LMP is out of date with current Corps regulations and does not take into account the recreational changes that have occurred since then. Without an updated SMP, management of the shoreline and the Project’s natural resources would continue under an outdated plan and the benefits of the proposed environmental restoration of degraded areas would be lost.

3.2 Proposed Action – Adoption of the 2021 MP and 2021 SMP 3.2.1 Master Plan Under this alternative, the 2021 MP would be approved for the Project and would


current uses. The scope of the 2021 MP and this EA are limited to actions on the Corps property.

3.2.1.1 Scope and Objectives of the 2021 MP The 2021 MP provides guidelines and direction for future Project development and use and is based on authorized Project purposes, Corps policies and regulations on the operation of Corps projects, responses to regional and local needs, resource capabilities and suitable uses, and expressed public interests consistent with authorized

1. Project Operations 2. High Density Recreation 3. Mitigation 4. Environmentally Sensitive Areas 5. Multiple Resource Management

Project purposes and pertinent legislation. The 2021 MP provides a District-level policy consistent with national objectives and other state and regional goals and programs.

3.2.1.2 Land Allocation, Land Classifications, and Resource Objectives Land allocations at all Corps Civil Works water resource projects are based on the Congressionally-authorized purpose for which the project lands were acquired. Since the 2007 MP, the Corps has changed the land classification nomenclature, which is concurrent with new land surveys. Land classification categories as defined by EP 1130-2-550, change 5, dated 30 January 2013, are as follows:

a. Low Density Recreation b. Wildlife Management c. Vegetative Management d. Future or Inactive Recreation

6. Water Surface a. Restricted b. Designated No-Wake c. Fish and Wildlife Sanctuary d. Open Recreation

See the 2021 MP Section 3.2 for a description of each land classification. The land classification and land use changes are outlined below in Table EA-1.

Table EA-1. Land classification and land use changes proposed.

2007 Master Plan 2021 Master Plan Existing Existing Acreage Proposed Proposed Acreage Multiple Resource Management

1,047.6 Low Density Recreation Wildlife Management Vegetative Management Future or Inactive Recreation

954.5 157 0 36


Environmentally Sensitive Areas

187.3 Environmentally Sensitive Areas

125.5

Mitigation 0 Mitigation 0 Recreation 193.5 High Density Recreation 149.6 Operations 72.5 Project Operations 78.9 Prohibited Boating Open Water Recreation River Recreation No-Wake

n/a

44.6

2,345.1

57.8

372.8

0

Restricted

Open Recreation

n/a

Designated No-Wake Designated No-Wake (Paddle Friendly) Fish and Wildlife Sanctuary

5

2,429

368.2 18.1

0

*Note: Acreage numbers for historical land use classifications were calculated in GIS software by scanning, georeferencing, and digitizing the 2007 Land Use Classification Map. Due to the scale and other limitations of the original hand-drawn map, acreages should be considered very approximate.

3.2.1.3 Proposed Recommendations The 2021 MP provides specific management recommendations including: coordinating partnerships with state and federal agencies, stakeholders, and the community; modernizing facilities within existing footprints and prioritizing actions that improve visitor safety and experience; updating land classifications, conserving wildlife management and environmentally sensitive areas through continued coordination with resource agency partners; developing survey methods to identify sensitive habitats, and enhancing natural areas and restoring sensitive habitats through native vegetation plantings; removal of invasive species along with other efforts targeted at non-game species habitat; and managing threatened and endangered species through U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS) Recovery Plans. Development proposals include adding a fish washing station and pavilion and reestablishing the beach area at the Somerfield North Recreation Area, adding full hookup camping sites and a fish washing station to the Outflow Recreation Area, extending Fisherman’s Trail, adding new multi-use trails, adding a courtesy dock and shower facilities to the Mill Run Recreation Area, adding a dog park below the dam, and demolishing government dwellings (see 2021 MP Sections 4 and 7).

Notable changes in land classification include an increase in acreage classified under Multiple Resource Management and decreases in acreage under Environmentally Sensitive Areas and the proposed High Density Recreation classification. The 2007 MP classified the Buffalo Run Project Site Area (BRPSA) under the Environmentally Sensitive Areas classification. A portion of the land at BRPSA contains wetlands, and the land is also used as a prime hunting area. The proposed changes in land US Army Corps of EngineersPittsburgh District Youghiogheny Master Plan Environmental Assessment 11

Two government dwellings located on Flanigan Road near the dam are no longer used at the Project and are proposed to be demolished. The dwellings are greater than 50 years old and there is the potential for the presence of asbestos containing materials and lead-based paint inside the buildings. Prior to any demolition work, the Corps and/or its contractor will be responsible for assessment, testing, and abatement, as applicable. The dwellings are also eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places. The demolition of the buildings will need to be evaluated for compliance with the National Historic Preservation Act and consultation with the Pennsylvania State Historic Preservation Office will be required.

The Fisherman’s trail is located at the dam adjacent to Spillway Beach. The existing trail is approximately 0.12 miles in length and the proposed extension will add another 0.14 miles to the trail. The trail will be approximately 4-6 feet in width and will be constructed by grading the extension area and placing gravel material on top. Some tree clearing may be necessary to construct the trail extension.

The addition of new multi-use trails is also proposed in the 2021 MP; however, no details are currently available. When specific plans and details are available in the future, the trail additions will need to be evaluated for environmental compliance (Clean Water Act (CWA), Endangered Species Act (ESA), National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), and other environmental laws as applicable).

The proposed courtesy dock at the Mill Run recreation area will be a floating EZ dock, which is a modular dock that can be configured as needed. The proposed dock is 5 feet wide by 20 feet long and will be placed directly adjacent to Mill Run. It will be anchored in the upland by an I-beam and in the water by a concrete drum. The anchors will remain in place year-round and the dock will be removed during the winter months.

Shower facilities will be added to the existing restroom building at the Mill Run Recreation Area. Work will be completed within the existing building using the existing utility lines.

classification separate the BRPSA into Environmentally Sensitive Area lands (wetlands) and Wildlife Management lands (non-wetlands), reflecting the current land use. Therefore, while the classification has changed under the new nomenclature the current and proposed uses of those lands remain the same. The 2007 MP listed a land use classification of Recreation, and the 2021 MP will reclassify those lands as both High Density Recreation and Low Density Recreation. Similarly, while the nomenclature has changed, the uses of those recreation lands will remain similar to their current uses.

The Outflow Recreation Area contains a number of camping sites, including 24 sites that are considered full hook up with electric and water utilities available. The 2021 MP includes a proposal to extend water and electric to an additional 36 existing campsites. The utility lines will be installed within previously disturbed areas within the existing road right-of-way.


A dog park is proposed in an open meadow area located directly below the dam. Work consists of the installation of a chain link fence in an area measuring approximately 4 acres.

Reestablishment of the bank at the beach area at the Somerfield North Recreation Area would consist of adding sand to the right of the launch ramp. Approximately 400 cubic yards of sand would be added with an average depth of 12 inches. Sand would be placed on top of the existing beach area. The Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM)

fish habitats are also expected with the installation of floating islands and suspended fish habitat structures.

Modernization of facilities within existing footprints will need to be evaluated for environmental compliance if earth disturbance or construction activities are proposed once plan details are available.

elevation is considered to be at normal summer pool (elevation 1439.0 feet). Sand would be placed below the OHWM. Specific plan details are not yet available. The proposed work will need to be evaluated for environmental compliance (Clean Water Act, Endangered Species Act, National Historic Preservation Act, and other environmental laws as applicable) when plan details are finalized.

The addition of a pavilion at the Somerfield North Recreation Area would be constructed in the area of the existing comfort station and parking lot near the boat launch. The surface will be graded 6 to 12 inches to create a level pad, posts will be installed approximately 36 inches in depth to support a wooden pavilion with a shingled roof. The dimensions of the pavilion will be approximately 20 feet by 40 feet.

Fish washing stations are proposed at the Somerfield North Recreation Area and the Outflow Recreation Area with work including the construction of a pavilion on a concrete pad, installation of water lines, and the construction and installation of the fish washing stations. Specific plan details including project footprints are not yet available. When specific plans and details are available in the future, the fish washing stations will need to be evaluated for environmental compliance (Clean Water Act, Endangered Species Act, National Historic Preservation Act, and other environmental laws as applicable).

Recommendations in the 2021 MP that will have no environmental impacts include coordinating partnerships with state and federal agencies, stakeholders, and the community; prioritizing actions that improve visitor safety and experience; conserving wildlife management and environmentally sensitive areas through continued coordination with resource agency partners; developing survey methods to identify sensitive habitats; and managing threatened and endangered species through USFWS Recovery Plans.

Enhancing natural areas and restoring sensitive habitats through native vegetation plantings, and removal of invasive species along with other efforts targeted at non-game species habitat will provide minor benefits to fish and wildlife habitats. Minor benefits to


While all of the recommendations listed in the 2021 MP were considered in this EA, there are not enough details available to fully evaluate the environmental impacts of all of the recommendations. Table EA-2 details the proposed recommendations and lists whether the recommendations have been fully or partially evaluated for environmental impacts in this EA.

Table EA-2. Recommendations and level of environmental compliance evaluation for MP.

Recommendation Full Compliance Partial Compliance Coordinating partnerships Yes Modernizing Facilities No A separate evaluation for

compliance with environmental laws will need to be completed once specific plans are developed.

Updating land classifications

Yes

Identify and demolish unused structures

No A separate evaluation for compliance with environmental laws will need to be completed once specific plans are developed.

Extend Fisherman’s trail No Evaluation for NHPA compliance and consultation with the Pennsylvania State Historic Preservation Office (PA SHPO) still needed.

Add new multi-use trails No No – a separate evaluation for compliance with environmental laws will need to be completed once specific plans are developed.

Add courtesy dock at Mill Run recreation area

Yes

Add shower facilities at Mill Run recreation area

Yes

Add full hook up sites at Outflow recreation area

No Evaluation for NHPA compliance and consultation with the PA SHPO still needed.


Add a dog park No Evaluation for NHPA compliance and consultation with the PA SHPO still needed.

Reestablish the beach area at Somerfield North

No No – a separate evaluation for compliance with environmental laws will need to be completed once specific plans are developed.

Pavilion at Somerfield North

Yes

Add fish washing stations No No – a separate evaluation for compliance with environmental laws will need to be completed once specific plans are developed.

Conservation of wildlife management and ESAs

Yes

Surveys, native plantings, and invasive species removal

Yes

Managing T&E species with USFWS recovery plans

Yes

Floating islands and fish habitat structures

Yes

3.2.2 Shoreline Management Plan Under this alternative, the 2021 SMP would be approved for the Project to provide management guidance and would replace the 1987 LMP. The 2021 SMP addresses important updates due to recreation demand, amenities within the project, current environmental conditions, and pertinent laws and policies.

3.2.2.1 Scope and Objectives of the 2021 SMP In implementing the 2021 SMP, the Corps intends to balance private shoreline uses with the protection and restoration of the natural environmental conditions of the Project. In the absence of a management plan, substantial portions of the shoreline could be cleared of natural vegetation and become congested with private mooring facilities and other structures. Federal lands which are available to the general public could exhibit the appearance of private property of adjacent landowners. The 2021 SMP contains definitive guidance, which balances permitted private uses of public resources with providing natural environmental conditions for the use and enjoyment of the general


public. The development of the 2021 SMP has included full consideration of existing permitted private use facilities and prior commitments made regarding them.

3.2.2.2 Shoreline Allocations Shoreline allocations provide the basic framework for the development, management, and operation of Project facilities and resources. To meet the objectives of the SMP, it is essential to manage (by permit or license), the type, number, and location of private facilities and activities on public land and water. The Project’s shoreline is allocated into four categories to balance the shoreline use and development:

lude

on, rapid

4. Limited development areas. Limited Development Areas are those areas of the Project owned in fee by the United States and are areas established through prior development, public use, and management designation. Floating facilities and certain land-based activities may be authorized in these areas if a Shoreline Use Permit (SUP) and/or license is obtained. Applications are reviewed on a first-come, first-served basis, and are evaluated based on individual merit. Several natural resource management considerations must be satisfied prior to

1. Prohibited access areas. Prohibited access areas are established for the physical safety of the public or security reasons. Shoreline use privileges are not allowed in these areas. The areas at the Project within this classification inc the immediate area of the dam, including the posted danger/restricted areas upstream and downstream of the structure, and the service base, including restricted access to the maintenance shop at the dam site.

2. Public recreation areas. Public recreation areas include the Outflow Recreation Area, Spillway Recreation Area, Poplar Hollow, Somerfield North Recreation Area, Mill Run Recreation Area, Jockey Hollow Boat Launch, Yough Lake Campground, Yough Lake Marina, and Friendsville Park. These areas have been developed around the reservoir in accordance with the MP to provide for the recreational needs of the public. The MP and the Project’s Operational Management Plan contain descriptions of these areas. No private shoreline use facilities and/or activities will be permitted within or near designated or developed public recreation areas.

3. Protected shoreline areas. Protected shoreline areas have been established to retain the natural, undeveloped character of the shoreline, maintain shoreline aesthetics, prevent erosion, and protect other environmental resources of the reservoir. Fish and wildlife areas; scenic areas; cultural, historical or archaeological areas; areas impractical for moorage due to water depths, or areas too shallow for navigation, subject to excessive siltation, erosi dewatering, or exposure to high wind, wave, or currents are included in this designation. Shoreline use privileges will not be granted in these areas.


approving or denying a SUP and/or license, including density of development, navigation, environment, safety, and site conditions.

A map of the shoreline allocations can be found in Appendix C of the 2021 SMP. No changes to shoreline allocations are proposed.

3.2.2.3 Proposed Recommendations Proposed recommendations in the 2021 SMP include: changes to individual docks consisting of specifications pertaining to dock walkway dimension, maximum dock width and length; spacing of docks with regard to location of other surrounding docks; allowable paint colors for docks; enclosed dock storage dimensions and allowance of attached ladders to docks; defining requirements for community docks and boat clubs; prohibiting the use of roofs or sundecks on docks; adding requirements for electric line installation; specification of construction materials and colors for steps, walkways, and footbridges along with the requirement that applications must be submitted to the Resource Manager and Real Estate office for approval; requiring a regeneration plan for unauthorized tree and vegetation removal; adding survey standards and requirements for resolution of encroachments before initial SUP/license or renewals are approved; specifications on areas that can be mowed with existing mowing permits and prohibition of new mowing permits; requirements for submission of boundary delineations to Resource Manager for review; and specifications for allowable erosion and sedimentation control methods. Table EA-3 details the proposed changes.

Table EA-3. Proposed changes between 1987 LMP and 2021 SMP.

Category 1987 LMP 2021 SMP

Individual Docks, Land Allocations

Limited Development Areas

Public Recreation Areas

Protected Lakeshore Areas

Prohibited Access Areas

No change.

Individual Docks, T or U shaped, T or U shaped, walkways 36-51 Construction walkways 36-48 inches in width. Front walkway Requirements inches in width,

framing will be 2 x 6 inch lumber.

up to 72 inches in width. Maximum dock width is 30 feet and may extend no more than 75 feet from the beginning of the gangway to the outer back edge of the dock, in a direction


perpendicular to the shoreline. The dock shall not exceed 75 feet in length or one-third the width of the channel, whichever is less

Individual Docks, Docks are authorized Docks are authorized in Limited Location and Spacing in Limited

Development Areas only. Density will not exceed 50% of the shoreline allocated.

Development Areas only. The dock must also be located at least 50 feet from every other dock using the outer edge of the dock structure as a reference point for measuring. Density will not exceed 50% of the Limited Development Area. Only one vessel will be allowed for all new SUPs. Existing SUPs with more than one vessel will be grandfathered.

Individual Docks, Standards for Color Restrictions

White or solid color Neutral earth tone colors: white, dark green, black, tan, brown or gray.

Individual Docks, Storage Not in this Plan Enclosed storage on docks will Compartments/Ladders be limited to a maximum of 50

cubic feet and used for water related recreation equipment only. Ladders for entering and exiting the water may be attached to the dock structure.

Community Docks and Boat Clubs

Applications for community boat docks or boat clubs must be accompanied with a photocopy of appropriate Articles of Incorporation or Partnership of a non-profit organization or the Articles of Agreement. A complete and current listing of registration

A community dock is owned by members of an association that have a common boundary with the Corps. The Association must be a legally incorporated non-profit organization. Each member will have their own SUP. A new community dock cannot accommodate individuals who do not own adjacent property to the reservoir. A boat club is owned by members of an association that must be a


numbers of all boats must be provided. Only one application should be filed under the official name of the organization.

legally incorporated non-profit organization. While each member has access to their own individual slip, only one SUP is required for a boat club. Existing boat clubs will continue to operate under their approved corporate charter and by-laws. Liability insurance may be required.

Individual Docks, Roofs and Sundecks

Not in this Plan Docks shall not contain roofs or sundecks.

Electrical Lighting and Equipment

Light poles and their accompanying electric lines may be licensed where necessary as safety items. Electric lines shall either be buried or strung no lower than 8 feet above the ground and have a shut-off device above the flood pool elevation of 1470 msl. No electric lines or lights will be attached to trees. All applicable state and local health and electrical codes (including the National Electrical Code) shall be adhered to.

Electrical equipment, including service for a private dock or shoreline security light, may be permitted provided that the installation of such equipment must conform to the National Electric Code, the National Electric Safety Code and all other applicable Federal, state and local codes and regulations. The electrical installation must be completed by a licensed electrician and a copy of the electrical inspection certificate must be furnished to the Resource Manager in conjunction with the Pittsburgh District Real Estate Office before final approval. Electrical facilities on public property will only be approved to provide security lighting or power for a permitted private dock. Overhead electrical lines will not be permitted unless the Resource Manager determines that natural conditions preclude underground installation. Electrical lines or fixtures cannot


be affixed to trees on public property.

Steps and Walkways Steps, walkways, and footbridges will be licensed in Limited Development Areas.

Materials used must be structural lumber. Metal staircases, placed concrete, or mortared block, brick or stone will not be authorized. Composite decking may be used on the walkways and railings. All wooded materials shall be pressure treated or otherwise treated with wood preservative that will not damage the environment. No wood treated with arsenic is authorized. Wood treated for ‘ground contact’ or for marine environment is recommended. Painting of steps or walkways shall only consist of the following neutral earth tone colors: white, dark green, black, tan, brown, or gray. An application must be submitted to the Resource Manager in conjunction with the Pittsburgh District Real Estate Office before final approval.

Regeneration of Open Areas

Not in this Plan Unauthorized tree/vegetation cutting is a violation of 36 CFR Part 327, and will require a regeneration plan at the owner’s expense and suspension of any SUP. If plantings need to be done, a plan will be developed for the area with a mixture of native trees/shrubs and approved by the Resource Manager. Corps staff will periodically evaluate the planting areas to ensure successful regeneration.


Boundary Line Not in this Plan Local survey standards include Surveillance and boundary monuments, H-beams Encroachment Policy and/or carsonite posts, and paint

blazes on trees. In areas where the distance between corners is such that the monuments or pins are not visible, posts with signs may be placed by the Corps to witness the property line. A request for an initial SUP or license or the reissuance of an existing SUP or license will be denied if an encroachment is not resolved.

Duration of Shoreline Use Permit

Five-year term No change.

Mowing Permits in Limited Development Areas

Individual docks may mow 75 feet or the width of their lot, whichever is the least. Boat clubs may mow up to 200 feet.

Permittee’s are allowed to mow an area adjacent to his or her dock that is no greater than 75 feet from the edge of the summer pool vegetation line or the width of the associated property. Adjacent property owners will add a 25-foot buffer zone of vegetation that cannot be removed, starting from the edge of the non-vegetative shoreline and extending up the bank of the reservoir 25 feet. No new mowing permits will be allowed.

Boundary Delineations Not in this Plan The permittee shall submit his or her proposed method of delineation to the Resource Manager for consideration.

Erosion Control Methods The erosion control structure may be of rip-rap (stone), wood, placed concrete, or masonry.

Biotechnical erosion control methods are encouraged. Use of rip-rap is authorized. R-4 rip-rap or large stone must be used. Small stone may also be approved as a filter blanket


provided it is topped with large stone. Public land disturbed by equipment used for placing rip-rap must be leveled, seeded, mulched and replanted with native trees (if required) to restore vegetative cover to the shoreline.

Table EA-4 details the proposed recommendations and lists whether the recommendations have been fully or partially evaluated for environmental impacts in this EA. Full compliance as described in Table EA-4 refers to the changes between the 1987 LMP and the 2021 SMP. Individuals seeking SUP, licenses, or other permissions to implement any of these private uses must obtain any other necessary local, state, and/or federal permits as required, including but not limited to Clean Water Act permits.

Table EA-4. Level of environmental compliance evaluation for 2021 SMP.

Topic Change Full Compliance Partial Compliance Individual docks, construction requirements

Change in dock dimensions

Yes Note that individuals requesting permission to construct docks must obtain any required local, state, and/or federal permits, including but not limited to Clean Water Act permits.

Individual docks, location and spacing

Spacing requirement change, limit one vessel for new permits

Yes

Individual docks, standards for color restrictions

Change in allowable colors to neutral earth tones

Yes

Individual docks, storage compartments/ladders

Allows maximum of 50 cubic feet of enclosed storage and ladder requirements

Yes

Community docks and boat clubs

Defines requirements for

Yes


community docks and boat clubs

Individual docks, roofs and sundecks

Prohibits roofs and sundecks on docks

Yes

Electrical lighting and equipment

Requires installation by licensed electrician and furnishment of electrical inspection certificate to Project and Real Estate for approval

Yes

Steps and walkways Adds requirements for allowable construction materials and paint colors. Requires application and approval by Project and Real Estate

Yes

Regeneration of Open Areas

Requires regeneration plan for unauthorized tree and vegetation cutting

Yes

Boundary line Adds survey Yes surveillance and standards and ties encroachment policy new SUPs and

reissuance of SUPs to encroachment resolution

Mowing permits in limited development areas

Changes mowing allowances, requires vegetative buffer zone, prohibits new mowing permits

Yes

Boundary Requires permittee Yes delineations to submit proposed

method of delineation to Project


Erosion control methods

Adds requirements for erosion control methods

Yes Note that individuals requesting permission to implement shoreline erosion control methods must obtain any required local, state, and/or federal permits, including but not limited to Clean Water Act permits (Sections 404 and 401).

4 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences NEPA and the CEQ’s NEPA Implementing Regulations require that an EA identify the likely environmental effects of a proposed project and that the agency determine whether those impacts may be significant. The determination of whether an impact significantly affects the quality of the human environment must consider the potentially affected environment and the degree of the effects of the impacts (40 CFR 1501.3).

The potentially affected environment is the area in which the proposed action would take place. The potentially affected environment is based on the specific location of the proposed action(s) and takes into account the entire affected region, the affected interests, and the locality.

The term “degree” refers to the intensity or severity of impact that would result if the proposed action were implemented. Some examples of factors considered when evaluating the degree of an impact include: the extent of both beneficial (positive) and adverse (negative) effects, the extent to which the proposed project affects public health or safety, the extent of impacts to unique characteristics of the geographic area (some examples include proximity to historic or cultural resources, wetlands, or ecologically critical areas), the extent to which the action may adversely affect an endangered or threatened species or its habitat, and whether the action is related to other actions that combined may cause long-term or short-term effects.

This section describes the existing environmental conditions within the Project (affected environment) providing a baseline for measuring expected changes that would result from adopting the proposed 2021 MP.

This section provides a discussion of any beneficial or adverse environmental effects of the Proposed Action alternative and the No Action alternative. The terms “impact” and “effect” are used interchangeably in this section. Effects may occur at the same time and place or may occur at a later time or a distance away from an action but have a US Army Corps of EngineersPittsburgh District Youghiogheny Master Plan Environmental Assessment 24

reasonably close causal relationship to a proposed action. The section also describes whether effects are temporary (short-term and occurring during the period of construction or implementation) or permanent (long-term and remaining for years into the future). The term “significant” means that an effect would result in a substantial change to the environment or resource. Minor effects do not substantially change the environment or resource.

4.1 Aesthetics 4.1.1 Existing Condition The Project offers diverse scenic and natural

iresources within a rural forested area.

Forest and reservoir habitats offer opportunities for wildlife v ewing and the 16 miles of shoreline also offer scenic views and wildlife viewing.

4.1.2 Environmental Consequences 4.1.2.1 No Action Under the no action alternative, 2021 MP and 2021 SMP would not be approved for the Project. The current conditions would continue to exist. No impacts to aesthetics would occur.

4.1.2.2 Proposed Action Implementation of the 2021 MP and 2021 SMP would be expected to have no long-term adverse effects on the aesthetic character of the Project. Future development may cause temporary and localized changes in aesthetics during construction; however, these changes would not be expected to cause significant or adverse impacts to the aesthetics of the Project.

A minor beneficial impact is expected with the 2021 SMP requirement of neutral earth tone colors on docks, steps, and walkways, the restrictions on the size of enclosed storage on docks, and the prohibition of roofs and sundecks on docks. These requirements will blend man-made structures into the surrounding natural environment and improve the aesthetic qualities of the viewshed.

4.2 Air Quality The Clean Air Act requires the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) to set National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for six common air pollutants, known as criteria air pollutants. These pollutants include lead, sulfur dioxide, particulate matter (PM-2.5 and PM-10), ozone, carbon monoxide, and nitrogen dioxide (USEPA, 2021a). The NAAQS are the concentrations of these principal pollutants, above which, adverse effects on human health may occur. Areas that persistently exceed the standards are designated as nonattainment areas. Federal actions must not cause or contribute to new violations, worsen existing violations, or delay attainment of NAAQS.

4.2.1 Existing Condition The Project is located in the Southwest Pennsylvania Intrastate Air Quality Control Region (40 CFR 81.23) and the Cumberland-Keyser Interstate Air Quality Control US Army Corps of EngineersPittsburgh District Youghiogheny Master Plan Environmental Assessment 25

category

Daily AQI Values, 201 0 to 2020 Fayette County, PA

I Good (<= 50 AQI) Moderate (51-100AQI ) Unhealthy for sensitive Groups (101 -150 AQI) Unhealthy (151-200 AQI) Very Unhealthy (201 -300 AQI) Hazardous (>=301 AQI)

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SE P

201s ■1• 11• ■I•■• 11 1•11 2019 ---- -■-■-••11 ■■ --•·· 2020 Uiiiiiiiiiii••••••■ ■ I 1•■

OCT NOV DEC

-l l ■-111111

Region (40 CFR 81.59). Only Fayette County is not in attainment for the 8-hour ozone (2008) standard. The Project is in attainment for all other NAAQS in Fayette, Somerset, and Garrett Counties (USEPA, 2021b). The Project is located within a rural area and de minimis emissions likely occur from gasoline vapors, motor vehicle exhaust, and lawn care equipment exhaust on a regular basis, and construction equipment exhaust during construction work.

The USEPA index for reporting air quality is the U.S. Air Quality Index (AQI). Values range from 0 to 500. As AQI values increase, air pollution levels increase. An AQI value range between 0-50 is considered “good” with little to no risk of air pollution causing health problems. AQI values ranging from 51-100 are considered “moderate” where air quality is acceptable, but populations sensitive to air pollution may have an increased risk of health problems. AQI values greater than 100 are considered unhealthy (Airnow, 2021). Daily AQI values for Fayette County, Somerset County, and Garrett County are shown in Figures 2, 3, and 4.

Figure 2 – Daily AQI values from May 2018 to September 2020 for Fayette County (USEPA, 2021c)


AQI Category

I Good (<= so AQI) Moderate (51 -100 AQI)

Daily AQI Values, 201 0 to 2020 Somerset County. PA

Unhealthy for Sensitive Groups (101-150 AQI) I Unhealthy (151-200AQI) I Very UnhealthY (201 -300 AQI) I Hazardous (>=301 AQI)

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

JAN FEB

AQI Category

I Good (<= 50 AQI) Moderate (51 -100 AQI)

Daily AQI Values, 2010 to 2020 Garrett County, MD

I Unhealthy for Sensitive Groups (101-1 so AQI) I UnhealthY (151 -200 AQI) I Very UnheatthY (201-300 AQI) I Hazardous (>=301 AQI)

Figure 3 – Daily AQI values from Jan 2010 to September 2020 for Somerset County (USEPA, 2021c)

Figure 4 – Daily AQI values from January 2010 to September 2020 for Garrett County (USEPA, 2021c)

4.2.2 Environmental Consequences 4.2.2.1 No Action Under the no action alternative, the 2021 MP and 2021 SMP would not be approved for the Project. The Project would continue to be operated and managed under the 2007 MP and 1987 LMP. Temporary and minor impacts to air quality would still occur from construction activities, vehicle exhaust, boat exhaust, and the use of grills and firepits. These impacts are considered de minimis due to their temporary and localized nature.


4.2.2.2 Proposed Action Air quality would not be predicted to change from existing conditions as the effects of implementing the 2021 MP and 2021 SMP, including the future development actions on air quality, would be minimal. Localized and temporary emissions associated with construction of new or improved amenities would occur. Emissions associated with construction equipment operation and construction would be considered de minimis, as they would be localized, of relatively short duration, and would occur when constructing any new or improved future development features.

i

Temporary and minor impacts to air quality would continue to occur from typical recreation use at the Project (e.g., vehicle and boat exhaust, and the use of grills and firepits); however, these impacts are de minimis due to their temporary and localized nature.

4.3 Aquatic Resources, Wetlands, Hydrology, and Water Quality 4.3.1 Existing Condition The 2,796-acre Youghiogheny River Lake is located on the Youghiogheny River with 2,150 acres in Pennsylvania and 646 acres in Maryland. Mill Run, Buffalo Run, and Tub Run are three of the largest streams that flow directly into the reservoir. The Youghiogheny River flows in a northwesterly direction to ts confluence with the Monongahela

2,382.3 acres of wetlands. There are 4.5 acres of freshwater emergent wetlands, 35.9 acres of riverine wetlands, 2,302.9 acres of reservoir wetlands, 3 acres of freshwater pond wetlands, and 36 acres of freshwater forested/shrub wetlands. Many of these wetlands are already disturbed or under the Water Surface classification and therefore not classified as an Environmentally Sensitive Area. See Appendix B, Plate 5 for the wetlands map.

Water quality standards are the provisions that describe the desired condition of a water body and the means by which that condition will be achieved (USEPA, 2021d). Water quality standards for waters in Pennsylvania and Maryland are developed by Pennsylvania and Maryland respectively, and approved by EPA, and form the legal basis for controlling pollutants entering waters of the United States (WOTUS). Water quality standards consist of three core elements which are designated uses (recreation, water supply, aquatic life), criteria (numeric concentrations of chemical constituents and/or a narrative describing a condition), and ant

River. The Monongahela River continues northward to Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, where it joins the Allegheny River to form the Ohio River.

According to the National Wetland Inventory (NWI), the Project includes approximately

idegradation requirements (maintenance and protection of existing uses and high quality waters).

States assess waters based on water quality standards to determine if waters are meeting designated uses, meeting water quality standard criteria and degradation requirements. Streams that do not meet these standards are considered impaired.


Under current water quality standards, Youghiogheny River Lake is considered impaired for mercury in Pennsylvania. Mercury in the air can settle into bodies of water, where it is changed into methylmercury by microorganisms (USEPA, 2021e).

Impairments listed for the Youghiogheny River in Maryland include low pH, sediments and impacts to biological communities. In 2007, a Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) report was prepared by the Maryland Department of the Environment and approved by EPA to address impairment caused by low pH.

ty staff

4.3.2

expected to cause water quality degradat

ally unrelated to the management actions on Project lands and results from land use and discharges to the watershed upstream from the Project.

Reestablishment of the beach at the Somerfield North Recreation Area will need to be evaluated for compliance under the Clean Water Act once plan details are finalized, including obtaining Section 401 water quality certification from the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection if required.

Water quality monitoring at the reservoir has been performed by the Corps regularly since the 1970s. Data collected includes chemical, physical, and biological samples. Project staff take biweekly samples from the dam outflow. Corps water quali conduct yearly limnology surveys of the reservoir. Also, every ten years, monthly intensive limnology surveys are conducted from March through November to document long-term changes within the reservoir.

Environmental Consequences 4.3.2.1 No Action Under the no action alternative, the 2021 MP and 2021 SMP would not be approved for the Project. The Project would continue to be managed under the existing 2007 MP and 1987 LMP. There are no known extensive development plans in the area that would be

ion in the reservoir. Continued water quality monitoring would occur with the no action alternative to track any changes caused by local development, allowing corrective measures to be considered if needed. Impacts that would occur from proposed future development would continue to be evaluated for compliance with the Clean Water Act. No impacts to aquatic resources, wetlands, hydrology, or water quality would occur.

4.3.2.2 Proposed Action Under the proposed action, future development under the 2021 MP and 2021 SMP would occur without adverse effects to the water quality of the reservoir or its tributaries. Construction activities would result in ground-surface disturbances that could increase runoff, but best management practices during construction would be expected to minimize the potential for adverse water quality impacts. After construction is completed, disturbed areas would be revegetated to minimize erosion and sedimentation, and to protect surface soils. The existing water quality in the reservoir is a result of factors substanti

Future development in areas surrounding the reservoir would require the use of appropriate best management practices to avoid adverse impacts to water quality. US Army Corps of EngineersPittsburgh District Youghiogheny Master Plan Environmental Assessment 29

Those developments would be evaluated for water quality impacts and Clean Water Act permits would be obtained, as needed, once project specific plans and details are available. No impacts to aquatic resources, wetlands, hydrology, or water quality are expected to occur under this alternative.

The proposed floating dock at the Mill Run Recreational Area consists of the placement of an I-beam anchored in the upland and a concrete drum located on the shoreline that the dock will be anchored to. The placement of the anchor structures is not considered fill for the purposes of Clean Water Act compliance and does not require an analysis under Section 404 or Section 401. Likewise, the installation of floating islands and suspended fish habitat structures would not be considered fill for the purposes of Clean Water Act compliance.

Requests from individuals for private shoreline uses, such as dock construction or shoreline erosion control, may require permits under the Clean Water Act. It is the responsibility of the individuals to obtain any required local, state, and/or federal permits prior to commencement of work that may impact WOTUS.

4.4 Invasive Species 4.4.1 Existing Condition The most common invasive terrestrial plant species occurring at the Project are: Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica), Japanese knotweed (Polygonum cuspidatum), autumn olive (Elaeagnus umbellata), buckthorns (Rhamnus frangula, R. cathartica), purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria), common reed or phragmites (Phragmites australis), reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea), garlic mustard (Alliaria petiolata), multiflora rose (Rosa multiflora), giant hogweed (Heracleum mantegazzianum), and bush honeysuckles (Lonicera maackii, L. tatarica, L. morrowii). The most common invasive insects are: emerald ash borer (Agrilus planipennis), gypsy moth (Lymantria dispar), and the hemlock woolly adelgid (Adelges tsugae).

4.4.2 Environmental Consequences 4.4.2.1 No Action Currently there is no management plan for invasive species. Under the no action alternative, the District would continue to implement best management practices with regards to invasive species management. No adverse impacts from invasive species are expected.

4.4.2.2 Proposed Action The 2021 MP proactively addresses invasive species issues and will follow current District policy by using a formalized process of adaptive and best management practices in prevention, education, early detection, rapid response, and containment to try to control and manage invasive species. One of the proposed development activities is to develop an invasive species management plan. It is expected that there will be a minor beneficial impact as a result of the control and reduction of invasive species at the


Project and further beneficial impacts when the management plan has been developed and implemented. No change to invasive species is expected with the 2021 SMP.

4.5 Fish and Wildlife Habitat 4.5.1 Existing Condition Fish and wildlife habitats at the Project consist of forested habitat, scrub-shrub uplands, wetlands, streams, the Youghiogheny River, and the reservoir. The Project habitats support a variety of wildlife species common to Pennsylvania. A few of the more common avian species likely to occur at the Project include osprey (Pandion haliaetus), turkey (Meleagris gallopavo), red-winged blackbirds (Agelaius phoeniceus), robins (Turdus migratorius), song sparrows (Melospiza melodia), common mergansers (Mergus merganser), and mallards (Anas platyrhynchos).

Mammal diversity is typically associated with large, intact tracts of forest. Mammal species of the region commonly include white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus), red fox (Vulpes vulpes), opossum, (Didelphis virginiana), raccoon (Procyon lotor), gray squirrel (Sciurus carolinensis), white-footed mouse (Peromyscus leucopus), and short-tailed shrew (Blarina brevicauda). Smaller populations of black bear (Ursus americanus), bobcat (Lynx rufus), and fisher (Pekania pennanti) are also present. The hairy-tailed mole (Parascalops breweri), smoky shrew (Sorex fumeus), and eastern woodrat (Neotoma floridana) are rare species that may exist on Project lands.

The Project also provides habitat for a diverse assemblage of fish species including smallmouth/largemouth bass (Micropterus sp.), walleye (Sander vitreus), yellow perch (Perca flavescens), black crappie (Pomoxis nigromaculatus), muskellunge (Esox masquinongy) catfish (i.e., Ictalurus punctatus, Ameiurus catus, etc.), common carp (Cyprinus carpio), white sucker (Catostomus commersonii), golden redhorse (Moxostoma erythrurum), northern pike (Esox lucius), and other species.

In addition, the Project supports a variety of amphibians and reptiles including a number of different frog, turtle, salamander, and snake species.

Virtually all of the Project has been timbered and much has been grazed or farmed since European settlement in the eighteenth century. Consequently, forest cover on the Project has been extensively altered, and is currently comprised of second and third growth stands, which dominate the Project land cover (see Appendix B, Plate 4 Vegetative Classification map).

4.5.2 Environmental Consequences 4.5.2.1 No Action Continued use of the existing 2007 MP and 1987 LMP would not be expected to have an effect on fish and wildlife habitat.

4.5.2.2 Proposed Action Proposed development actions on the Project must comply with the NEPA and all other laws pertaining to the conservation of natural resources, including fish and wildlife


habitat. Prior to implementation of any development activity that could adversely impact wetlands, terrestrial habitats, or aquatic habitats, field surveys and all appropriate coordination with state and/or federal agencies will be conducted by the Corps of Engineers. As such, future development would occur with minimal effects to the habitats of the Project. No significant impacts to fish and wildlife habitat are expected with the 2021 MP.

Minor beneficial impacts to fish habitat are expected with the installation of floating

bark, in cavities or crevices of both live trees and snags (dead trees) and hibernates during winter months in caves and mines (USFWS, 2021b).

Bald eagles are known to nest within the Project and are regularly sighted in the vicinity of the reservoir. These birds are protected under the MBTA and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act.

islands and suspended fish habitat structures. Minor beneficial impacts to fish and wildlife habitat are expected with native plantings and invasive species removal. Minor beneficial impacts to fish and wildlife habitat may occur with the mowing and buffer vegetation requirements proposed in the 2021 SMP.

4.6 Federally Protected Species, including Threatened and Endangered Species Under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973 (16 U.S.C. §§ 1531-1544), endangered species are defined as any species in danger of extinction throughout all or portions of its range. A threatened species is any species likely to become endangered in the foreseeable future. The ESA defines critical habitat of the above species as a geographic area that contains the physical or biological features that are essential to the conservation of a particular species and that may need special management or protection. This section also covers birds listed under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) of 1918 (16 U.S.C §§ 703-712) as birds of conservation concern and birds listed under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (16 U.S.C. §§ 668-668d).

4.6.1 Existing Condition The USFWS Information for Planning and Consultation website provides site specific information regarding whether or not threatened or endangered species may be present in a particular location. The species information is made available through an official species list. An official species list from the USFWS, dated January 11, 2021, for the Project included two species: the Indiana bat (Myotis sodalis), and the northern long-eared bat (Myotis septentrionalis).

Potentially occupied habitat exists for the endangered Indiana bat at the Project. The Indiana bat roosts under the peeling bark of dead and dying trees during the summer months and hibernates during the winter months in caves or abandoned mines (USFWS, 2021a).

Potentially occupied habitat exists for the threatened northern long-eared bat at the Project. During the summer months, the northern long-eared bat resides underneath


4.6.2 Environmental Consequences 4.6.2.1 No Action The no action alternative would not affect federally listed threatened and endangered species and would not affect bald eagles.

4.6.2.2 Proposed Action The proposed action would not affect the Indiana bat or the northern long-eared bat. The proposed action would not affect bald eagles.

encompassed a total of 43 acres, or approximately three percent of the entire Project lands.

The Project is one of rich cultural history. Archaeological research indicates that the areas of Fayette and Somerset Counties have been inhabited since the Paleoindian times (ca. 16,000 BP- 10,500 BP). A total of 27 archaeological sites and one historic structure have been identified within Project lands. Three of these archaeological sites

Best management practices, to include seasonal restrictions on tree and vegetation removal, would ensure that no impact would occur. These restrictions would be species specific, based on recovery plans. Once site specific details are available for future proposed development, those plans will be reviewed to determine compliance with the ESA. Consultation with the USFWS under Section 7 of the ESA will be initiated if it is determined that those activities may affect ESA-listed species. Prior to any clearing of vegetation or construction activities, coordination with the USFWS will be performed and surveys for Indiana bats, and northern long-eared bats would be conducted as necessary to ensure compliance. By avoiding sensitive areas and sensitive seasons (April-October for trees equal to or greater than 3-inches diameter at breast height (dbh) that may be used as bat habitats) and using adaptive management as needed to correct any unforeseen impacts, no significant impact to threatened or endangered species is expected.

A search of the Pennsylvania Natural Diversity Inventory database for the proposed dog park, the Fisherman’s Trail extension, the Outflow Recreation Area Campground site, and the Somerfield North Recreation Area beach indicated no known impacts to federally listed threatened or endangered species. A search of the USFWS Information for Planning and Consultation database identified a potential impact to the northern long-eared bat in at the Mill Run Recreation Area. The installation of the floating dock will not require tree cutting and will have no effect on the northern long-eared bat.

4.7 Historic Properties and Other Cultural Resources 4.7.1 Existing Condition In 1989, following the development of a cultural resources predictive model, the Corps completed a Phase I cultural resources reconnaissance survey of five areas within Project lands. These five areas were selected in consultation with the Pennsylvania and the Maryland State Historic Preservation Offices based on their potential for future development and/or their high archaeological potential. The five surveyed areas


have been determined eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places. The National Register of Historic Places is the official list of the nation’s historic places worthy of preservation. The three eligible sites consist of three different prehistoric occupation sites. These sites are eligible under Criterion D due to their research potential.

4.7.1.1 No Action Under the no action alternative, the 2021 MP and 2021 SMP would not be approved for the Project in the foreseeable future. Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended, and its implementing regulations (36 CFR Part 800) require Federal agencies to take into account the effect of an undertaking on historic and archeological resources if that project is under the direct or indirect jurisdiction of the agency or has been licensed or assisted by that agency. Compliance with the NHPA is required for any future development. The no action alternative will not impact cultural resources.

4.7.1.2 Proposed Action Implementing the 2021 MP and 2021 SMP with future development actions would be expected to

Pennsylvania State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) and Maryland SHPO will be conducted by the Corps. Federal and state laws require federal agencies to minimize ormitigate adverse impacts to historic properties (36 CFR Part 800.13). Should unanticipated historic or prehistoric resources be discovered during ground disturbing activities, work must cease immediately, and the Corps will contact the Pennsylvania and/or Maryland SHPO.

Consultation with the Pennsylvania SHPO and Maryland SHPO will be initiated for the proposed development activities, including the demolition of the government dwellings, described in Section 3.2 of this EA.

4.8 Floodplains 4.8.1 Existing Condition Floodplains are present adjacent to areas along the reservoir and its tributaries.

4.8.2 Environmental Consequences

have no effect on the cultural resources of the Project as all proposed development actions would still be required to comply with the NHPA. Prior to implementation of any ground disturbing activity, including any of the future development proposed, field surveys and Section 106 NHPA coordination with the

4.8.2.1 No Action Continuing to manage the Project under the 2007 MP and 1987 LMP would not be expected to impact floodplains.

4.8.2.2 Proposed Action There would be no environmental consequences of adopting the 2021 MP and 2021 SMP expected on floodplains at the Project.


4.9 Hazardous, Toxic, and Radioactive Waste 4.9.1 Existing Condition Hazardous materials are regulated by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), Oil Pollution Act, Toxic Substances Control Act, and related guidelines established by the Corps, Pennsylvania, and Maryland. There are no permitted hazardous waste disposal facilities in proximity to the Project and there are no known sites of hazardous, toxic, or radioactive materials

ocated surrounding the Project where previous

(HTRW) on Project lands.

While petroleum is not regulated under CERCLA, there are areas within the Project where petroleum products are present and pose the potential for leaks and/or discharges. At the Project, the Yough Lake Marina provides refueling. Petroleum products are stored in underground/aboveground storage tanks. A search of U.S. EPA’s envirofacts database shows coal mining and natural gas pipelines within the vicinity of the Project (USEPA, 2021f). There are no coal mines or oil and gas wells located within the Project. Abandoned mine lands are l coal mining occurred and abandoned mine drainage has affected water quality at the Project in the past, although remediation efforts have resulted in improvements to water quality.

4.9.2 Environmental Consequences 4.9.2.1 No Action Under the no action alternative, the 2021 MP and 2021 SMP would not be approved for the Project. Future development would likely still occur without the benefit of a comprehensive planning document. Regardless, there would be no environmental consequences related to HTRW because these substances are not found on Project lands. If any developments on the Corps property are proposed, Federal law requires site-specific environmental due diligence on a case-by-case basis before development can occur. Any change in the storage or use of hazardous materials must comply with federal regulations.

4.9.2.2 Proposed Action Implementing the 2021 MP and 2021 SMP would be expected to have no effect on HTRW materials as these substances are not found on Project lands. Any future development proposed requires site-specific environmental due diligence. Any change in the storage or use of HTRW materials must comply with federal regulations, and as such the implementation of the 2021 MP and 2021 SMP would not cause any environmental consequences.

Due to the age of the government dwellings, there is the potential for the presence of asbestos containing materials and lead-based paint inside the buildings. Prior to any demolition work, the Corps and/or its contractor will be responsible for assessment, testing, and abatement, as applicable. Lead-based paint or asbestos containing materials, if present, will be managed in accordance with ER 200-2-3, Environmental Compliance Policies, and other applicable laws and regulations. US Army Corps of EngineersPittsburgh District Youghiogheny Master Plan Environmental Assessment 35

4.10 Land Use 4.10.1 Existing Condition The Project provides a wide variety of recreational opportunities. The Project provides opportunities for camping, boating, swimming, and access for hunting and fishing. There are multiple recreation and picnic areas located throughout the project.

4.10.2 Environmental Consequences 4.10.2.1 No Action Under the no action alternative, the 2021 MP and 2021 SMP would not be approved for

t is possible that Project-lost.

the Project in the foreseeable future. Recreation and visitation would likely continue. The continued use of the 2007 MP and 1987 LMP would not accurately reflect existing or future recreational needs with regard to land use. The Corps would continue to operate the Project but without the benefit of an updated MP and SMP as guidance for management decisions. Without an updated MP and SMP, i wide consideration of individual actions may be

4.10.2.2 Proposed Action The recreational needs of the public would be better accommodated through the implementation

Sensitive Areas, and a decrease in proposed Hi le the nomenclature has changed, the uses of those lands will remain similar to their current uses. No adverse impacts or changes in land use will occur with the new nomenclature. No recreational capacity, facilities, or lands are lost on account of this reclassification.

The 2021 SMP requires that docks are to be located at least 50 feet from every other dock and that the density of docks will not exceed 50% of the Limited Development Area. There would be a minor benefit to land use with the limitation of docks.

4.11 Navigation There are no navigable waters within the Project. No impacts to navigable waters will occur with either the no action alternative or the proposed action alternative.

4.12 Noise Levels 4.12.1 Existing Condition Noise levels are measured in units of sound pressure levels called decibels. A-weighted

of the proposed action and is reflective of the changes in land usage. Notable changes in land classification include an increase in acreage under the proposed Wildlife Management Areas, a decrease in acreage of Environmentally

gh Density Recreation lands. Whi

sound levels, abbreviated as dBA, describe how the human ear perceives relative loudness (USDL, 2021). Typical noise sources at the Project such as those described in Table EA-5, would include commercial and residential vehicle traffic, lawn care, motor boats and jet skis, and temporary construction projects (USDL, 2021 and CDC, 2021). Noise levels above 85 decibels can damage hearing depending upon the length of time that someone is exposed to the noise (CDC, 2021).


Table EA-5. Typical noise sources and levels.

4.12.2 Environmental Consequences 4.12.2.1 No Action Under the no action alternative, the 2021 MP and 2021 SMP would not be approved for the Project. No changes to typical noise levels at the Project would occur and no adverse impacts are expected.

Noise Source/Activity Typical Noise Level (dBA) Silent Room 20 Residence 50 Normal Conversation 60 City Traffic 85 Lawn Mower 85 Motorboat and Jet Ski 90 Motorcycle 95 Car Horn (at 16 feet) 100 Construction Activity (Operating Heavy Equipment)

120

on, but best management practices would be levels

ion areas, picnic areas,

MP. Regular roadway maintenance would be expected to occur. No adverse impacts to public infrastructure are expected. No change to public infrastructure is expected with continuing to manage the Project with the 1987 LMP.

4.12.2.2 Proposed Action Implementing the 2021 MP and 2021 SMP would not result in long-term effects related to the level of background or ambient noise at the Project. Temporary increases in noise would be expected during future constructi implemented to minimize noise from construction equipment and activities. Noise would be expected to return to typical levels once construction activities are complete.

4.13 Public Infrastructure 4.13.1 Existing Condition Roadways within the Project allow access to camping, recreat and fishing and boating access.

4.13.2 Environmental Consequences 4.13.2.1 No Action Under the no action alternative, the Project would continue to be managed by the 2007

4.13.2.2 Proposed Action The 2021 MP proposed facility modernization including improvements to roads leading to and surrounding the Project. Implementing the 2021 MP would provide minor


beneficial impacts to public infrastructure (roadways) within the Project. No change to public infrastructure is expected with implementing the 2021 SMP.

4.14 Environmental Justice and Socio-economics Executive Order 12898, dated February 11, 1994, directs each federal agency to “make achieving environmental justice part of its mission by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects of its programs, policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income populations.”

representation; and (6) tribal representat

The following definit

• identi Census’ identi

ity to one another, or a set

identified where either: (a) the minority population of the affected area exceeds 50 percent or (b) the minority population percentage of the affected area is meaningfully greater than the minority population percentage in the general population or other appropriate unit of geographic analysis. In identifying minority communities, agencies may consider as a community either a group of individuals living in geographic proximity to one another, or a geographically dispersed/transient set of individuals (such as migrant workers or Native American ), where either type of

The CEQ has oversight of the federal government’s compliance with EO 12898 and NEPA. CEQ, in consultation with the USEPA and other affected agencies, developed NEPA guidance for addressing requirements of the EO (CEQ, 1997). This guidance was developed to further assist federal agencies with their NEPA procedures so that environmental justice (EJ) concerns are effectively identified and addressed.

The CEQ has also identified six general principles for consideration in identifying and addressing EJ in the NEPA process which include: (1) area composition (demographics); (2) data (concerning cumulative exposure to human health or environmental hazards); (3) interrelated factors (recognize the interrelated cultural, social, occupational, or economic factors); (4) public participation; (5) community

ion.

ions are used by the CEQ in guidance on key terms of the EO:

Low-income population: Low-income populations in an affected area should be fied with the annual statistical poverty thresholds from the Bureau of the

Current Population Reports, Series P-60 on Income and Poverty. In fying low income populations, agencies may consider as a community

either a group of individuals living in geographic proxim of individuals (such as migrant workers or Native Americans), where either type of group experiences common conditions of environmental exposure or effect.

• Minority: Individual(s) who are members of the following population groups: American Indian or Alaskan Native; Asian or Pacific Islander; Black, not of Hispanic origin; or Hispanic.

• Minority population: Minority populations should be


group experiences common conditions of environmental exposure or effect. The selection of the appropriate unit of geographic analysis may be a governing body’s jurisdiction, a neighborhood, census tract, or other similar unit that is to be chosen so as to not artificially dilute or inflate the affected minority population. A minority population also exists if there is more than one minority group present and the minority percentage, as calculated by aggregating all minority persons, meets one of the above-stated thresholds.

interrelated to impacts on the natural or physical environment.

Whether environmental effects are significant (as employed by NEPA) and are or may be having an adverse impact on minority populations, low-income populations, or Indian tribes that

• Disproportionately high and adverse human health effects: When determining whether human health effects are disproportionately high and adverse, agencies are to consider the following three factors to the extent practicable:

o Whether the health effects, which may be measured in risks and rates, are significant (as employed by NEPA), or above generally accepted norms. Adverse health effects may include bodily impairment, infirmity, illness, or death.

o Whether the risk or rate of hazard exposure by a minority population, low-income population, or Indian tribe to an environmental hazard is significant (as employed by NEPA) and appreciably exceeds or is likely to appreciably exceed the risk or rate to the general population or other appropriate comparison group.

o Whether health effects occur in a minority population, low-income population, or Indian tribe affected by cumulative or multiple adverse exposures from environmental hazards.

o Disproportionally high and adverse environmental effects: When determining whether environmental effects are disproportionately high and adverse, agencies are to consider the following three factors to the extent practicable:

Whether there is or will be an impact on the natural or physical environment that significantly (as employed by NEPA) and adversely affects a minority population, low-income population, or Indian tribe. Such effects may include ecological, cultural, human health, economic, or social impacts on minority communities, low-income communities, or Indian tribes when those impacts are


appreciably exceeds or is likely to appreciably exceed those on the general population or other appropriate comparison group.

Whether the environmental effects occur or would occur in a minority population, low-income population, or Indian tribe affected by cumulative or multiple adverse exposures from environmental hazards. (Ibid. Appendix A, pp. 25-27).

4.14.1 Existing Condition The Project is located in Fayette and Somerset Counties, Pennsylvania and in Garrett County, Maryland. Data from the US EPA’s EJSCREEN tool indicates that within the census blocks encompassing the Project in Pennsylvania, approximately 6% of the population is considered a minority population and approximately 43% of the population is low-income (USEPA, 2021g). In Maryland, approximately 2% of the population is considered a minority population and approximately 34% of the population is low-income (USEPA, 2021g). See 2021 MP Section 2.3 for more detail.

4.14.2 Environmental Consequences 4.14.2.1 No Action Under the no action alternative, the 2021 MP and 2021 SMP would not be adopted and the Project would continue to operate under the existing 2007 MP and 1987 LMP. Continuing to operate under the 2007 MP and 1987 LMP would not cause disproportional adverse effects to either minority or low-income communities.

4.14.2.2 Proposed Action Implementing the 2021 MP and 2021 SMP would not cause disproportionate adverse effects to minority or low-income communities.

4.15 Climate Change 4.15.1 Existing Condition The project is located in the temperate continental climatic zone, a region of seasonally widely varying temperatures, and moderate, year-round precipitation increasing slightly during the warmer months. Over the past 10 years (2010-2019), average precipitation rates for southwestern Pennsylvania totaled 42.53 inches (NOAA, 2021a). July is the warmest month with a 30-year mean temperature of 72.6°F, while January is the coldest month with a 30-year mean temperature of 28.4°F (NOAA, 2021b). Precipitation varies from year to year but has averaged approximately 45 inches annually at Confluence (USCD, 2021).

Climate change is expected to continue to warm the region throughout the 21st century, with temperature increases projected to occur relatively evenly throughout the year (Drum et al., 2017). Intolerant flora and fauna, as well as species currently existing on the edge of their range, are at greatest risk of local extirpation as a result of altered environmental conditions expected under climate change (USEPA, 2021h). There is


potential for water management and water quality difficulties, such as not being able to make summer pool in time for the recreation season due to drought conditions (USEPA, 2021i). There is also the possibility of increased storm runoff, due to climate change, which could potentially result in greater inputs of pollution, which in turn can affect water quality of the reservoir and downstream of the reservoir. Increased runoff may alter rates of sedimentation within the reservoir and reduce the lifetime of the reservoir (USEPA, 2021j).

responses to regional and local needs, resource capabilities and suitable uses, and expressed public interests consistent with authorized Project purposes and pertinent legislation.

Careful planning, sound engineering, appropriate coordination with resource agencies and effective execution have developed the recreational resources at the Project while

4.15.2 Environmental Consequences 4.15.2.1 No Action Under the no action alternative, the Project would continue to be operated under the 2007 MP and 1987 LMP. No changes to climate would occur under the no action alternative.

4.15.2.2 Proposed Action There would be no environmental consequences on the climate for present or future actions resulting from adopting the 2021 MP and 2021 SMP in the project vicinity.

4.16 Child Health and Safety 4.16.1 Existing Condition While there are no schools or daycares within the Project, children are expected to be present at the Project due to the variety of recreational opportunities, including campgrounds, located at the Project.

4.16.2 Environmental Consequences 4.16.2.1 No Action Under the no action alternative, the Project would continue to be managed under the 2007 MP and 1987 LMP. No adverse impacts to child health and safety would occur.

4.16.2.2 Proposed Action The 2021 MP includes future construction and development. Appropriate safety measures would be implemented during any construction activities to protect child health and safety. No adverse impacts to child health and safety are expected with the 2021 MP and 2021 SMP.

5 Summary of Environmental Effects The 2021 MP and 2021 SMP provide guidelines and direction for future Project development and use, and are based on authorized Project purposes, Corps of Engineers policies and regulations on the operation of Corps of Engineers projects,


protecting and enhancing the important environmental resources; these practices would be expected to continue.

If and when future development projects were implemented, localized and temporary construction-related effects (e.g., diesel/gasoline engine emissions, noise, fugitive dust, minor earth-moving) would be the extent of the environmental consequences. Compliance with the CWA, ESA, NHPA, and other environmental laws as applicable, would be completed prior to future development projects to ensure that no significant environmental effects occur.

6 Compliance with Environmental Laws Acceptance of the 2021 Youghiogheny River Lake MP and 2021 SMP and the subsequent construction of the potential future modifications to existing infrastructure as well as new features would not commence until the proposed actions achieve environmental compliance with the applicable laws and regulations, as described below. Environmental compliance for any proposed actions would be achieved upon coordination of this Environmental Assessment with appropriate agencies, organizations, and individuals for their review and comments.

Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act, 16 U.S.C. Sec. 668-668d.

In compliance.

The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act prohibits the taking, possession or commerce of bald and golden eagles, except under certain circumstances. Amendments in 1972 added penalties for violations of the Act or related regulations. Adopting the 2021 MP and 2021 SMP would not adversely affect bald or golden eagles, or their habitat.

Clean Air Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 1857h-7, et seq.

In compliance.

The purpose of this Act is to protect public health and welfare by the control of air pollution at its source, and to set forth primary and secondary National Ambient Air Quality Standards to establish criteria for States to attain or maintain. Minor and temporary releases would occur during construction activities for actions to maintain or improve facilities at the Project; however, these emissions would be short- term, small-scale, and would be considered de minimis. No significant impacts to air quality are expected with the adoption of the 2021 MP and 2021 SMP.

Clean Water Act, as amended, (Federal Water Pollution Control Act) 33 U.S.C. 1251, et seq.

In compliance.

The Clean Water Act (CWA) is the primary legislative vehicle for federal water pollution control programs and the basic structure for regulating discharges of pollutants into US Army Corps of EngineersPittsburgh District Youghiogheny Master Plan Environmental Assessment 42

WOTUS, which includes navigable waters, rivers, streams, and wetlands. The CWA was established to “restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the nation’s waters.” The CWA sets goals to eliminate discharges of pollutants into navigable waters, protect fish and wildlife, and prohibit the discharge of toxic pollutants in quantities that could adversely affect the environment. The Corps regulates discharges of dredge or fill material into WOTUS pursuant to Section 404 of the CWA. Section 404 authorization is required to place dredge or fill material into WOTUS. If authorization under Section 404 is required, then Section 401 water quality certification is required from the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania or the state of Maryland. A National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit would be required under Section 402 of the CWA, if proposed construction activities would disturb greater than one acre of land.

The proposed projects considered in the 2021 MP and 2021 SMP would not result in the placement of dredge or fill material into WOTUS, with the exception of the beach reestablishment at the Somerfield North Recreation Area. When plan details are finalized, then the appropriate authorizations under the CWA (Sections 404/401/402) would need to be obtained prior to the placement of dredge or fill material.

Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) of 1980.

Not applicable.

CERCLA was passed in response to numerous abandoned, leaking hazardous waste sites, discovered in the late 1970’s, which posed serious threats to human health and the environment. CERCLA was designed to impose cleanup and reporting requirements on the private sector, as well as federal facilities, by identifying those sites where releases of hazardous substances had occurred or might occur, and pose a serious threat to human health, welfare or the environment; taking appropriate action to remedy those releases; and seeking that the parties responsible for the releases pay for the cleanup activities. CERCLA authorizes cleanup responses when there is a release or threat of a release of a hazardous substance into the environment and sets a framework for accomplishing those actions. To the extent such knowledge is available, 40 CFR Part 373 requires notification of CERCLA hazardous substances in a land transfer. The implementation of the 2021 MP and 2021 SMP would not involve real estate transactions.

Endangered Species Act, as amended. 16 U.S.C. 1531, et seq.

In compliance.

The Endangered Species Act (ESA) establishes a national program for the conservation of threatened and endangered species of fish, wildlife, and plants and the habitat upon which they depend. Section 7(a) of the ESA requires that federal agencies consult with the USFWS to ensure that proposed actions are not likely to jeopardize the continued


existence of endangered or threatened species or to adversely modify or destroy designated critical habitats.

The adoption of the 2021 MP and 2021 SMP would not affect threatened or endangered species. Future development will be evaluated for compliance with the ESA once specific plans and details are developed. Agency consultations, if necessary, will be conducted for future developments once plans are established.

Environmental Justice (E.O. 12898).

In compliance.

E.O. 12898 mandates that “each federal agency shall make achieving environmental justice part of its mission by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects of its programs, policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income populations.” The proposed updates to the MP and SMP do not disproportionately affect minority or low- income populations.

Federal Water Project Recreation Act, 16 U.S.C. 460(l)(12), et. seq.

In compliance.

In the planning of any federal navigation, flood control, reclamation, or water resources project, the Federal Water Project Recreation Act, as amended, requires that full consideration be given to opportunities that the Project affords for outdoor recreation and fish and wildlife enhancement. The Act requires planning with respect to development of recreation potential. Projects must be constructed, maintained, and operated in such a manner if recreational opportunities are consistent with the purpose of the Project. The proposed updates to the MP include development of recreational opportunities, and fish and wildlife enhancement. The proposed updates to the SMP include development of recreational opportunities.

Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, as amended, 16 U.S.C. 661, et seq.

In compliance.

The Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act requires governmental agencies, including the Corps, to coordinate activities so that adverse effects on fish and wildlife would be minimized when water bodies are proposed for modification. No modifications are proposed in association with the proposed update to the MP and SMP.

Migratory Bird Treaty Act

In compliance.

The Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918 (MBTA) is the domestic law that affirms, or implements, the United States' commitment to four international conventions with Canada, Japan, Mexico, and Russia for the protection of shared migratory bird


resources. The MBTA governs the taking, killing, possession, transportation, and importation of migratory birds, their eggs, parts, and nests. The take of any migratory bird is governed by the MBTA's regulation of taking migratory birds for educational, scientific, and recreational purposes and requiring harvest to be limited to levels that prevent overutilization. Executive Order 13186 (2001) directs agencies to take certain actions to implement the act. The Corps of Engineers will consult with the USFWS with regard to their consideration of the effects of the actions identified in the MP revision for potential effects on migratory birds for future development projects once specific plans and details are available. No effects are anticipated from the adoption of the 2021 MP or 2021 SMP.

National Historic Preservation Act, as amended, 16 U.S.C. 470a, et seq.

In compliance.

Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 and its implementing regulations (36 CFR 800) require federal agencies to identify and resolve adverse effects to historic properties within the Area of Potential Effects (APE) of projects, activities, or programs funded in whole or in part under direct or indirect jurisdiction of a federal agency. Historic properties include buildings, structures, objects, sites, and historic districts worthy of preservation due to historic significance. This process is carried out in consultation with Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, State Historic Preservation Offices (SHPO), Certified Local Governments, Indian Tribes, and the interested public.

The Pittsburgh District has made the determination that the actions identified in the proposed 2021 MP update (coordinating partnerships, prioritizing actions that improve visitor safety and experience, conservation of wildlife management and ESAs, surveys, native plantings, and invasive species removal, management of threatened and endangered species with USFWS recovery plans) do not have the potential to adversely impact cultural resources. The actions identified in the 2021 SMP do not have the potential to adversely impact cultural resources.

Consultation with the Pennsylvania and Maryland SHPOs is currently being conducted for the proposed development projects identified in Section 3.2 of this EA.

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), as amended, 42 U.S.C. 4321, et seq.

In compliance.

This EA and Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) have been prepared in accordance with the CEQ’s NEPA Implementing Regulations (40 CFR 1500-1508). An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is not required.

Noise Control Act of 1972, 42 U.S.C. Sec. 4901 to 4918.

In compliance.


This Act establishes a national policy to promote an environment for all Americans free from noise that jeopardizes their health and welfare. Federal agencies are required to limit noise emissions to within compliance levels. Noise emission levels at the Project site would increase above current levels temporarily due to construction of improvements or features identified in the 2021 MP and 2021 SMP. Appropriate measures would be taken to keep the noise level within the compliance levels.

Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 403)

In compliance.

This law prohibits the unauthorized obstruction des that the construction of any structure in or over

or alteration of any navigable water of the United States. This section provi any navigable water of the United States, or the accomplishment of any other work affecting the course, location, condition, or physical capacity of such waters is unlawful unless the work has been recommended by the Chief of Engineers and authorized by the Secretary of the Army. The actions identified in the 2021 MP and 2021 SMP would not involve the construction of structures within the reservoir.

Floodplain Management (E.O. 11988).

In compliance.

Executive Order 11988 requires federal agencies to avoid, to the extent possible, the long and short-term adverse impacts associated with the occupancy of the floodplain, and to avoid direct and indirect support of floodplain development where there is a practicable alternative. In accomplishing this objective, “each agency shall provide leadership and shall take action to reduce the risk of flood loss, to minimize the impact of floods on human safety, health and welfare, and to restore and preserve the natural and beneficial values served by flood plains.” The actions identified in the 2021 MP and 2021 SMP would not affect the flood holding capacity or flood surface profiles of the reservoir.

Invasive Species (E.O. 13312).

In compliance.

Federal agencies shall not authorize, fund, or carry out actions that it believes are likely to cause or promote the introduction or spread of invasive species in the United States or elsewhere unless, pursuant to guidelines that it has prescribed, the agency has determined and made public its determination that the benefits of such actions clearly outweigh the potential harm caused by invasive species; and that all feasible and prudent measures to minimize risk of harm will be taken in conjunction with the actions. No invasive species will be introduced to the Project as a result of the proposed updates to the MP and SMP. Invasive species will be managed and controlled at the Project through invasive species removal and the development of control methods.

Protection of Wetlands (E.O. 11990). US Army Corps of EngineersPittsburgh District Youghiogheny Master Plan Environmental Assessment 46

In compliance.

Executive Order 11990 encourages federal agencies to take actions to minimize the destruction, loss or degradation of wetlands, and to preserve and enhance the natural and beneficial values of wetlands when undertaking federal activities and programs. Each agency, to the extent permitted by law, shall avoid undertaking or providing assistance for new construction located in wetlands unless the head of the agency finds (1) that there is no practicable alternative to such construction, and (2) that the proposed action includes all practicable measures to minimize harm to wetlands, which may result from such use. The actions identified in the 2021 MP and 2021 SMP would not involve construction in, or effects to, wetlands. Future development proposed will be evaluated for compliance under the CWA once specific plans and details are developed.

7 Public Involvement A scoping meeting was held on July 8, 2020 with Corps staff, Project partners and key stakeholders representing the Friends of the Youghiogheny River Lake, Yough Lake Marina, Maryland DNR, and the PAFBC. A virtual public meeting was also held on July 8, 2020. In compliance with 40 CFR 1501.4(e)(2), this EA is being circulated for a 30-day

iod wmplemented and addressed in the FONSI. The EA and FONSI w

n the Pittsburgh District’s administrative filrecord of NEPA compliance.

review to concerned agencies, organizations, and the interested public. All comments received during this review per ill be evaluated and appropriate changes to the EA will be i ill be retained i es for future reference and as a


8 References Airnow.gov. 2021. https://www.airnow.gov/aqi/aqi-basics. Accessed 24 February 2021.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). 2021. What Noises Cause Hearing Loss? https://www.cdc.gov/nceh/hearing_loss/what_noises_cause_hearing_loss.html. Accessed 29 April 2021.

Drum, R. G., J. Noel, J. Kovatch, L. Yeghiazarian, H. Stone, J. Stark, P. Kirshen, E. Best, E. Emery, J. Trimboli, J. Arnold, and D. Raff (2017), Ohio River Basin– Formulating Climate Change Mitigation/Adaptation Strategies Through Regional Collaboration with the ORB Alliance, May 2017. Civil Works Technical Report, CWTS 2017-01, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Institute for Water Resources: Alexandria, VA

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). 2021a. https://www.weather.gov/media/pbz/records/hisprec.pdf. Accessed 24 February 2021.

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). 2021b. https://www.weather.gov/media/pbz/records/histemp.pdf. Accessed 24 February 2021.

US Climate Data (USCD). 2021. https://www.usclimatedata.com/climate/confluence/pennsylvania/united-states/uspa0321. Accessed 29 April 2021.

United States Department of Labor (USDL). 2021. Occupational and Safety Health Administration. Occupational Noise Exposure. https://www.osha.gov/noise. Accessed 29 April 2021.

United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) 2021a. Criteria Air Pollutants website. Available online at: https://www.epa.gov/criteria-air-pollutants. Accessed 24 February 2021.

United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) 2021b. Green Book. https://www.epa.gov/green-book. Accessed 24 February 2021.

United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) 2021c. https://www.epa.gov/outdoor-air-quality-data/air-data-multiyear-tile-plot. Accessed 24 February 2021.

United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 2021d. https://www.epa.gov/standards-water-body-health/what-are-water-quality-standards. Accessed 24 February 2021.

United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 2021e. https://www.epa.gov/mercury/how-people-are-exposed-mercury. Accessed 24 February 2021.

United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) 2021f. Envirofacts database. https://enviro.epa.gov/index.html. Accessed 24 February 2021.


https://www.airnow.gov/aqi/aqi-basics.%20Accessed%2024%20February%202021

https://www.weather.gov/media/pbz/records/hisprec.pdf

https://www.weather.gov/media/pbz/records/histemp.pdf

https://www.usclimatedata.com/climate/confluence/pennsylvania/united-states/uspa0321

https://www.usclimatedata.com/climate/confluence/pennsylvania/united-states/uspa0321

https://www.epa.gov/criteria-air-pollutants

https://www.epa.gov/green-book

https://www.epa.gov/outdoor-air-quality-data/air-data-multiyear-tile-plot

https://www.epa.gov/standards-water-body-health/what-are-water-quality-standards

https://www.epa.gov/mercury/how-people-are-exposed-mercury

https://enviro.epa.gov/index.html

https://www.cdc.gov/nceh/hearing_loss/what_noises_cause_hearing_loss.html

https://Airnow.gov

United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) 2021g. Environmental Justice Screening and Mapping Tool. https://ejscreen.epa.gov/mapper. Accessed 3 February 2021.

United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 2021h. https://www.epa.gov/climate-indicators/ecosystems. Accessed 29 April 2021.

United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 2021i. Accessed 29

April 2021.

Accessed 29 April 2021.

United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2021a. https://www.fws.gov/mi February 2021.

United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2021b.

February 2021.

https://www.epa.gov/climate-indicators/climate-change-indicators-drought.

United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 2021j. https://www.epa.gov/climate-indicators/climate-change-indicators-river-flooding.

dwest/Ohio/EndangeredSpecies/indianabat.html. Accessed 24

https://www.fws.gov/midwest/endangered/mammals/nleb/index.html. Accessed 24


https://ejscreen.epa.gov/mapper

https://www.epa.gov/climate-indicators/ecosystems

https://www.epa.gov/climate-indicators/climate-change-indicators-drought

https://www.epa.gov/climate-indicators/climate-change-indicators-river-flooding

https://www.fws.gov/midwest/Ohio/EndangeredSpecies/indianabat.html

https://www.fws.gov/midwest/endangered/mammals/nleb/index.html

draft environmental assessment for the youghiogheny river ... and...a mp was developed for the...

Documents